Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
ARM-based CPU vs X86-64 CPU - I don't think you can reasonably draw any comparisons between the 2, if you are given the actual speeds. Different architectures, different instruction sets, etc. Apples to oranges comparisons, really....

To be fair, even with Intel CPUs, the traditional “more GHz is better” hasn’t been true for a while (I’m just talking consumer chips here) and that’s been confusing enough for people who are wondering why brand new laptops appear to be using slower chips than their 5 year old one.
 
Let's hope next year 16" MacBook Pro model will have a discrete GPU based on AMD's next-gen 6000M series. Honestly I don't believe that Apple GPU, even in its next interation, can come close to current Radeon Pro 5500M for example...
No way to use unified memory with an AMD dGPU, so that won’t be happening. It will use an Apple GPU.
 
To be fair, even with Intel CPUs, the traditional “more GHz is better” hasn’t been true for a while (I’m just talking consumer chips here) and that’s been confusing enough for people who are wondering why brand new laptops appear to be using slower chips than their 5 year old one.
Agree completely. People who still believe the Intel MHz/GHz marketing myths of yesteryear are **still** clueless how a 10th gen 1.x GHz chip can be fast. Intel is a victim of their own successful marketing.
 
What is unified ram vs regular ram. Listing differently between mba and mbp. Wonder if can think of ram usage with m1 like intel machines.
 
What is unified ram vs regular ram. Listing differently between mba and mbp. Wonder if can think of ram usage with m1 like intel machines.
Usuallly, if I understand it correctly, conventional RAM works with the CPU only and discrete GPUs have their own pool of RAM (vRAM) to use. With Unified RAM, both GPU and CPU is the same pool of memory.

Is that right MacRumors chat?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wags
It is 2020 and Apple just released base models with 256gb storage. To make matters worse, they’re charging $200 each, which is ludicrous, to go to 512 and 1tb. 512 should be the baseline. You can buy an extremely fast 1tb m.2 SSD for $200 aftermarket. In the past, each upgrade tier usually had multiple components for processing power, storage, and RAM. Taking the CPU out of the equation is making for really poor customer value on those storage and memory upgrades. Even an extremely casual user will fill up 256gb with music and photos. Such a cynical ploy. It’s 2020, not 2016 when those prices could be somewhat justified.
 
What would be the point? What would the ghz processor speed tell you? You can't compare it to Intel or AMD so it's kind of pointless. If they told you it was 1.5ghz and that the Intel is 2ghz you'd think it was slower, but because the power to watt is considerably better and it runs cooler it out performs it x3 (for example) as a marketer you're not going ot use "ghz" to advertise your processor than are you - it's pretty simple.
Still not seeing how you can meaningfully compare the Air & Pro M1 based on a top clock speed specification given one is passively cooled and the other is actively cooled and you have zero information regarding throttled clock speeds.

The useful data will come with benchmarks. Not clock speed figures.
..and actual application performance metrics. some benchmarks like GB5 won’t show thermal throttling effects well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: deeddawg
I don't really understand why the pro is more expensive and needs a fan. Higher frequency?
If history is any guide, the Pros will have faster SSDs, though for most people SSDs are so fast differences are hardly noticeable.
 
Usuallly, if I understand it correctly, conventional RAM works with the CPU only and discrete GPUs have their own pool of RAM (vRAM) to use. With Unified RAM, both GPU and CPU is the same pool of memory.

Is that right MacRumors chat?
Seems like a bottleneck. Penny pinching again?
 
That straight up doesn't make sense.

Think of it this way.

I give you a cup that holds 8 Oz. Now I give you a cup that holds 16 Oz. I tell you to fill both cups to 16 Oz.

The 8 Oz cup overflows onto the table (paging to HDD).

Doesn't matter if one has a bigger opening (higher frequency RAM), the limitations of concurrent use are still set by the quantity of space you have.
ARM applications actually use slighly more RAM than x86_64 because intructions are all aligned to the same word length. And data usage would be the same byte for byte.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JDGwf
What is unified ram vs regular ram. Listing differently between mba and mbp. Wonder if can think of ram usage with m1 like intel machines.
Integrated RAM means you do not have separate pools of ram for graphic and apps. It’s all one pool. For integrated graphics that’s always been the case, so this is not a step backwards. It’s much faster ram overall. That said, it’s fair to say you have less RAM available to apps with only 8gb if you plan on driving a huge high DPS 5k or 6k monitor and you’re planning on playing games or grinding through video processing. In other words, get the 16GB ram option if you plan to do pro stuff on a big monitor. Hardware devs might want to clarify, but that’s the gist of it.
 
It is 2020 and Apple just released base models with 256gb storage. To make matters worse, they’re charging $200 each, which is ludicrous, to go to 512 and 1tb. 512 should be the baseline. You can buy an extremely fast 1tb m.2 SSD for $200 aftermarket. In the past, each upgrade tier usually had multiple components for processing power, storage, and RAM. Taking the CPU out of the equation is making for really poor customer value on those storage and memory upgrades. Even an extremely casual user will fill up 256gb with music and photos. Such a cynical ploy. It’s 2020, not 2016 when those prices could be somewhat justified.
Until people vote wit their wallet, Apple will do what it can get away with.
 
Seems like a bottleneck. Penny pinching again?

It depends how you look at it. Unified RAM is better for the overall system and is likely MORE expensive then have 'shared ram'.

Shared RAM is when the RAM sits outside of the SOC and is shared between GPU & CPU. However it significantly increase the time the CPU/GPU spends getting/putting stuff there.

Unified RAM, has the RAM sitting right on the SOC making it ten fold faster to access for both the GPU & CPU.

The last option is Dedicated RAM for the CPU & GPU. The only downside is when you need to transfer data to the GPU it comes at significant cost.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JDGwf and Wags
Usuallly, if I understand it correctly, conventional RAM works with the CPU only and discrete GPUs have their own pool of RAM (vRAM) to use. With Unified RAM, both GPU and CPU is the same pool of memory.

Is that right MacRumors chat?
Yes.
Now the integrated RAM should have some solid bandwidth (more than external modules can provide), but there are performance penalties if the GPU and CPU are given unrelated workloads at the same time.

These have tended to be more severe for 'regular Intel IGPUs' though because they've been stuck working with external DDR modules, and typically slow low-power ones to boot. You don't get the 3600/4000MHz DDR4 modules on laptops that high speed desktops offer.

Intel actually has a small number of chips with eDRAM (functionally identical to what Apple is doing here), but they've basically ignored using the tech except for a small number of Laptop chips, despite giving considerable performance boosts in some benchmarks - even compared to modern CPUs.

AnandTech had an article on it actually last week.
 
If the Developer ARM Mac mini was anything close to what they announced, RAM works the same as on intel machines. 16GB max won't cut it for my PRO work. My Mac Pro pages out even with 96GB. Not matter how to try to defend Apple, lower RAM is not acceptable for working with large projects and files.

I think todays announcements were rushed to get the ASMac's out. By the time most of the software is up and running as expected, these will be obsoleted by newer versions.
 
Apple have approached the MacBook strategy like the iPhones with a single chip approach.

Air is the standard iPhone 12, and the iPhone 12 pro MBP
 
  • Like
Reactions: ascender
Apple have approached the MacBook strategy like the iPhones with a single chip approach.

Air is the standard iPhone 12, and the iPhone 12 pro MBP
What is the difference between the air and pro? Same chip and screen?
 
The higher end lines don't have much value if they're all using the same chip.

A lot of us have found that pushing the lower end models can get similar results anyway. The real issue was memory getting jammed up with Apples own system software and background processes, the started with Mojave. Otherwise the difference between 25 seconds of processor time was negligible for even most pro users. If this chip creates a smoother ride then there's going to be very little difference.
 
Waste? I run my day using the touch. BetterTouchBar and Keyboard Maestro and its pretty amazing what you can do with it.
I find very strange how two people can disagree with someone else’s experience. What are you split personalities inhabiting the same brain or something? Weird.

He’s giving his true experience of using the Touch Bar and saying it’s a positive one. If you have a different experience then say so, but disagreeing is illogical. I mean, I hate toffee. Are you going to hit the disagree button because you love toffee and think I’m wrong to hate it? Agree that I hate toffee, then go and post how much you love the stuff! 😐
 
Stick an M1 in the iPad Pro and be done with it all the MacBook air is an Apple iPad Superpro Max.
And you’ll have the benefit of having a Touch Screen!

Jobs was right. The MacBook doesn’t make sense with touch, but an iPad Pro that runs MacOS, perfect! 🤣
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.